You didn't answer the question! How are they striving to be inclusive if they didn't invite Jews for Jesus and Reform rabbis? Did they go beyond their comfort zone more than Agudah does? I see no indication of that. Their inclusivity is just an artifact of them being more comfortable with anti-Torah attitudes than Agudah is. But thank God they still have some red lines.
You really ought find something else in your forensic bag of tricks other than reductio ad absurdum. It's rather tiresome.
Since Natan has praised inclusivity, you moan that it's not inclusive enough. But we all know what you really mean. You want Natan to praise the congress for it's exclusivity. Then you could go apoplectic about how it wasn't exclusive enough.
The problem is that you conflate such exclusivity for piety.
NS tried to "bavorn" (forestall) the fatal problem with his post, by attempting to distinguish between those "who want to be inclusive within the framework" and those who are "looking to disqualify people." But of course, that's a complete fiction. EVERYONE claims to be the former, NO ONE admits to the latter. Happygolucky is correct. "Tolerance" is to the left exactly what NS claims (falsely) "Torah protects" is to the Charedim - a convenient slogan to hide behind, but not something anyone actually believes in.
" EVERYONE claims to be the former, NO ONE admits to the latter. "
Incorrect. Inclusivity and exclusivity can co-exist. So one can talk about Orthodox "pluralism" and still exclude those clearly beyond the pale. The debate would be where among the fringes to draw the line.
What you and hgl are implying is the ridiculous claim that any red lines would necessarily vindicate those whose red lines are way to the "right" of the mainstream.
RNS provides interesting information including statistics on interesting age old topics. Anti -religious groups have consistently claimed that religious observance is harmful both physically and mentally to people. RNS cites information to challenge this claim. RNS is not saying that this is why we believe in Judaism.
He doesn't mention the issue you mention here (which would indeed be a good reason to bring up such utilitarian arguments that would equally apply to Christianity or Buddhism). What he says is that there are no intellectual proofs for Judaism, but some inspirational stories. See my comment here https://www.rationalistjudaism.com/p/why-judaism/comment/13845727
And that is just one of thousands of posts and other writings maliciously undermining the Torah and the Mesorah.
At this point any differences you are proposing to distinguish between Mizrachi and Agudah are so fine as to be non-existent. Both claim inclusivity, and both have red lines. Face it - the post was absurd.
You don't get it. When as an ideology and a community, you throw off the yoke of the Torah, when the only thing important to you is tikkun olam, when, as Sharansky says, there is no difference between any Jews no matter their faith, then there is no reason to exclude Jews for Jesus anymore. None. Zero. I bet they are more pious than most of your liberal Modox rabbis.
Outside yeshivahland some questions are more 'thinking points'. Contemplate for a few hundred years and then we can discuss. Not an instant answer usually wrong.
"I was also honored when a certain black-hatted rabbinic leader with a very prestigious position came over to me and said that he enjoys reading my blog!"
Don't let it get to your head. Like the rest of us, he probably just enjoys watching you be made to look like a doofus, time and time again.
Unfounded speculation. Many black hatters (secretly) read stuff that would be frowned upon in their own communities. (e.g. In the Israeli Charedi world there are "underground" חבורות that learn the Torah of Rav Kook.)
Don't think that all Charedim are as close minded as Ha'aretz would have you believe. (Consider that much of what Natan was attacked for was just rewarmed content already widely served in the Charedi world- at least in the USA.)
"within the boundaries of what can be done without undermining the framework" - this my main contention with this blog. Pointing out (in other posts) certain Charedi inconsistencies, beliefs and even unhealthy attitudes - without recognizing that they serve to uphold a larger ethos - is damaging. For example, Rav Gershon Adelstein saying Bein Hazmanim causes more accidents b/c of a lack of learning is productive to the entire enterprise of Judaism from the macro level because his followers take it seriously. Reducing all the charedi-idms as this blog does undermines the framework. If you notice it, leave it alone (most of the time.) I won't be teaching my kids theistic evolution unless its necessary.
Oh, I agree, they absolutely all serve to uphold a larger ethos. But that ethos itself is incredibly damaging and dangerous for both the charedi community and the entire country!
That ethos, the unyielding commitment to torah and halacha, is the backbone of the jewish nation - something you do not find anywhere else (if were being honest.) These statements are spiritual bravado so-to-speak that we shouldn't undermine even if we roll our eyes at their statments (R' Gershon Adelstein.)
You see, that's where we disagree. I do not believe that the communal abandonment of the Torah's values vis-a-vis the value of work and national responsibilities reflects a commitment to Torah, nor provided the backbone of the nation.
You're not getting it. I don't either see the communal abandonment as a fulfillment of Torah values. I see it as an unfortunate reactionary response to unyielding secularism - something that is entirely inevitable. You always lampoon the fallout from Charedi isolationism (which produce these maladies) without realizing that these things are package deals - societies don't function like individuals. On a personal level, I don't adopt MANY Charedi attitudes, but from a societal perspective, I root for the team because deconstructing the society destroys the enterprise. Does anyone get what I'm saying?
Continuing repetition of inconsistencies and contradictions that you know are not proper and you claim to be proper and true, erases trust and belief. It leads to rejection of the Chareidi affiliation and commitment to Torah.
I see you understand what I'm saying. I think their is a nuanced difference between localized personal stances and attitudes you take vis-a-vis the community as a whole. In personal and non-official discussions (not public speeches or in print) people will express all sorts of heresies ("why is my tuition raised because of breaks to Kollel families" + the Charedi readers of this blog) that will never be spoken in public so as to keep the foundations of the institutions sturdy. To your point, when there is an explicit Piv V'Libo Ayno Shaviin (Chaim Walder episode) there is a trickle up effect that causes slow evolution in the establishments while offering the establishments plausible deniability that there ever was a problem. You see how this works?
Is your answer some sort of 'aveiroh lishmoh' tirutz? We can't fund an anti-secularism kollel/can't speak English properly societal lifestyle without benefit fraud, so that makes it ok?
Lol, you can redefine Judaism as "tikkun olam values" all you want, the Reform have already done this for 200 years, but nobody with Torah education is fooled. And you are only fooling yourself.
לתקן עלום במלכות ש-י. Tikkun Olam means a Torah kingdom where everybody recognizes Hashem and follows His commandments. Not the way the Reform movement (which you and your rabbis are apologists for) use it.
More ignorance. The "liberal" use of the term תיקון עולם didn't really exist significantly until at least the 1970s. There were some precursors, but they were limited and that would only be the 1950s, or if you stretch and strain, the 1930s.
How are minyan factories an unyielding commitment to torah and halochoh? What about benefit fraud? On a communal level, chareidie ethics may have this unyielding commitment. On an individual level, it is only found amongst yechidim. No different from other branches of orthodoxy.
"Benefit fraud" is such a tired out stereotype. Do you have any evidence of it on a communal scale? Taking advantage of available benefits is no more fraudulent than taking advantage of tax loopholes and offshore accounts. (And besides, the liberal ethos teaches us that one is never allowed to engage in stereotypes in the first place.)
Yes. I won't name my community. But they are paid (even in kollel) on the books the minimum amount to qualify for benefits (benefits are generally not given to layabouts and those not employed at all) and the balance in cash. Claiming to be 'not living together like spouses' to increase benefits. And then we have schools taking grants when they do not qualify. And simply not disclosing assets to receive more benefits.
If all that is true of your community, which I doubt, then its atypical. Most frum institutions are strictly by the book, and many of them have independent auditors to validate their practices. It's true, as I readily concede, that as a community they take advantage of all programs available, and perhaps they even test the boundaries. But if so, they are no different than other communities, businesses, and industries. If the benefits are out there - however unwisely that may be - then people are going to take advantage.
In more detail, how does a violent internal gur struggle (transgressing numerous mitzvos)have anything to do with secularism? How does burning trash, rioting, blocking roads(ditto re mitzvos) have anything to do with secularism? How do minyan factories have anything to do with secularism? How does benefit and mortgage fraud have anything to do with secularism?
It doesn't address my point. How is one branch of gur bashing up the other (literally) an unyielding commitment to torah and mitzvos? There are numerous examples to those who stop drinking the cool-aid. A very small subset of chareidi society, serious people in kollel, might uphold this. But the rest, its all image and chitzonious.
Look at the adverts for fancy hotels and stuff in the chareidi press. My wife tells me benei berak has skirts too short just like everywhere else.That is secularism just as much as anything else. Chareidim just define terms to suit themselves.
You sound like you might have a chassidishe background yourself. If so, you are being too hard on your own community. No society is or ever has been perfect. But to equate Chassidism with secularism is really too far.
I like your overall direction but I couldn't disagree with the above statement more. I still can't get my head around why a believing Jew should have a hard time understanding that an increase in tragedies is due to a lack of Torah study. See here:
We believe in the Orthodox enterprise,Mesorah or whatever you wish to call it. If we see a community that doesn't really believe in religious commitment we won't be convinced and certainly won't be inspired.
Pretending is not honesty or commitment to Mesorah. Your not serious how can one believe in your religious declarations. If the structure is very far from reality it falls.
It's been noted before that the loudest calls for "diversity" usually come from the *least* diverse and most homogenous people in the country. Vermont voters, Reform Jews, etc. So be careful who you make common cause with.
Vermonters and Reform Jews join with minority groups calling for diversity and civil rights. The white supremacists, white separatists, and the parochial communities stand alone in their bigotry. smh
And what do your kind do to further civil rights for minorities? Not shit that’s what. In fact y’all support parties that suppress civil rights. I’ll call out that bullshit right there.
"Likewise, I understand why people might not want to hear presentations from someone of lesser religious affiliation, . . . "
. . . Does "someone of lesser religious affiliation" mean me (Reform/Reconstructionist/Renewal) ?
My personal observance doesn't match up with charedi expectations, and they'd consider me either "fallen away" or simply a goy. On the other hand, I make it a point _not_ to steal from the State, something which many haredim have forgotten about.
"Many "haredim"? How many is many, big talker? Is that like "many" blacks are indolent? Or "many" Jews are pushy? How many other stereotypes do you want to engage in while you're shooting your mouth off about "haredim"?
The question and answer about why a stork is a non-kosher bird was given by the the first Gerer Rebbe, the Chidushei haRim. That implies that you need to be bound what he considers inclusivity.
Additionally, the issue is further complicated by the first posuk of tehillim, that is darshaned to mean one should stay away from negative people.
I was thinking about a previous post of R. Slifkin's, about Aryeh Deri saying that "Everybody does it", about cheating the government. I assumed it was his own supporters that he was talking about, since he'd know them best.
But you're right, I shouldn't use stereotyping -- you have my apologies.
Great site you got here! I think I'll be taking some of the style in mind. The buds at Roy Lumber and Oxford Lumber Drive love this kind of stuff. You're doin a great service to the industry! Good luck!
"I understand why people might not want to hear presentations from someone of lesser religious affiliation, but if they are not saying anything against their religious beliefs, is that adequate reason to exclude them?"
One day you might come across how R Chaim Soloveitchik answered that question.
"If Moshe Rabbeinu could get useful guidance from a Midianite priest, surely we can get useful guidance from people outside of our community!"
One day you might come across the מדרש שמואל על אבות'es guidelines of when to maintain a distance and when not, and you might come across R Aharon Kotler's comments regarding Yisro.
A good idea when wondering how any given phenomenon is addressed by whatever community, is to think if it's 'a deja vu' and search that community's history all the earlier times and what rationales were offered. Refusing the podium to the less religious is old news countless times, countless places. Find out the historic rationales.
You also might want to come across the Or HaChaim's comments about Yisro. I give his comments just a little bit more weight than RAK's (not to diminish RAK).
(A similar thing happened before in your Mar 30 post, 'The Chametz Blitz'. You wonder that 'It could still be that the charedim feel that his halachic desecration [of secular activists bringing Chametz to hospitals on Pesach in response to the Chametz ban law sponsored by the Chareidim] is worth it in order to take a strong public stand about religion. But I wonder if such a calculation is even being made, let alone whether it is valid.'
(But Chareidi activism/statements which cause violation of Halacha is going on as far back as we rember and beyond. This would be re-investigating the wheel.
(And you ask '(let alone) whether it is valid'. Years ago this was asked of Chareidi Poskim and they addressed it based on שיטה מקובצת ביצה ל. בסוגיא דמוטב שיהיו שוגגין. What would be the plan, every time Chareidim dig in their heels and the secular respond in kind, that you ask if the response was anticipated let alone valid, and I should quote the שיטה?)
120 years of the Mizrachi movement have been a veritable disaster for its followers and the hapless masses who had sent their poor kids into the shmad factories known as ממלכתי דתי בתי ספר. Mizrachi worships Zionism, elevates it over Judaism and continues the shmad unabaintgly to this very day. I'd learned in a Mizrachi Yeshiva 45 years ago and nothing has changed since that time.
'After all, there are certainly limits to the Torah’s inclusivity, especially with regard to non-Jews. So what’s the value in talking about being inclusive, if you just draw the line a little further out?'
ואהבת לרעיך כמוך - רעיך במיצוות. These are the parameters and every nation has similar limitations because 'diversity' is a disaster for the survival and the prosperity of a group. This politicaly incorrect reality is an evolutionary necessity אם חפצים חיים אנחנו.
Funny how all your comments are somehow anti-Zionists rants. The book is an polemic against Zionism, written by yakov. Funny thing is, all your comments seem to come straight out of his book.
Zionism is a Jewish national liberation movememt, which had to arise due to the historical circumstances. It's no different then similar movements of other nations in that historical period. Mizrachi sees it as divine and messianic and has sacrificed hundreds of thousands on its altar. This is what I know from having learned in a Mizrachi yeshiva and I reject that faith as heresy and nonsense. I'm not against the state, the army or the secular education, but I'm against seeing them as the fulfilment of the Torah. I would say that I'm a chareidi affiliated independened thinker. If Torah is of primary importance to you, affiliating with the charedim is the best way to live and educate your children. There aren't many 3rd generation mizrochnikim and for a good reason.
Doesn't matter the intention of Zionism, the point is, they are/were messengers of God in returning the Jewish people to their homeland. Why fight that, clearly it is the will of God.
That's what Mizrachi believes. A chiloni Jew in Eretz Yisroel working and serving in the army is bringing the Geulah, wheras a galuti shomer Torah is delaying it. I don't accept this beleif.
IOW, Todd claimed that worship of hereditary chiefs is limited to outside Mizrahi. Yakov testified that no, he saw it within Mizrahi. And you traced that to Chassidic roots.
You didn't answer the question! How are they striving to be inclusive if they didn't invite Jews for Jesus and Reform rabbis? Did they go beyond their comfort zone more than Agudah does? I see no indication of that. Their inclusivity is just an artifact of them being more comfortable with anti-Torah attitudes than Agudah is. But thank God they still have some red lines.
You really ought find something else in your forensic bag of tricks other than reductio ad absurdum. It's rather tiresome.
Since Natan has praised inclusivity, you moan that it's not inclusive enough. But we all know what you really mean. You want Natan to praise the congress for it's exclusivity. Then you could go apoplectic about how it wasn't exclusive enough.
The problem is that you conflate such exclusivity for piety.
NS tried to "bavorn" (forestall) the fatal problem with his post, by attempting to distinguish between those "who want to be inclusive within the framework" and those who are "looking to disqualify people." But of course, that's a complete fiction. EVERYONE claims to be the former, NO ONE admits to the latter. Happygolucky is correct. "Tolerance" is to the left exactly what NS claims (falsely) "Torah protects" is to the Charedim - a convenient slogan to hide behind, but not something anyone actually believes in.
" EVERYONE claims to be the former, NO ONE admits to the latter. "
Incorrect. Inclusivity and exclusivity can co-exist. So one can talk about Orthodox "pluralism" and still exclude those clearly beyond the pale. The debate would be where among the fringes to draw the line.
What you and hgl are implying is the ridiculous claim that any red lines would necessarily vindicate those whose red lines are way to the "right" of the mainstream.
Natan is *clearly* beyond the pale, yet they invited him. Curious.
https://irrationalistmodoxism.substack.com/p/is-there-anything-at-all-rational
https://irrationalistmodoxism.substack.com/p/what-is-a-jew
But as I said, I'm glad they have *some* red lines.
RNS provides interesting information including statistics on interesting age old topics. Anti -religious groups have consistently claimed that religious observance is harmful both physically and mentally to people. RNS cites information to challenge this claim. RNS is not saying that this is why we believe in Judaism.
He doesn't mention the issue you mention here (which would indeed be a good reason to bring up such utilitarian arguments that would equally apply to Christianity or Buddhism). What he says is that there are no intellectual proofs for Judaism, but some inspirational stories. See my comment here https://www.rationalistjudaism.com/p/why-judaism/comment/13845727
And that is just one of thousands of posts and other writings maliciously undermining the Torah and the Mesorah.
Mainstream you say, although as shown in these pages that at least in certain countries the proportion of so-called Chareidim to MO is roughly 2:1.
As to the secular, they famously אינם מן המנין.
At this point any differences you are proposing to distinguish between Mizrachi and Agudah are so fine as to be non-existent. Both claim inclusivity, and both have red lines. Face it - the post was absurd.
You don't get it. When as an ideology and a community, you throw off the yoke of the Torah, when the only thing important to you is tikkun olam, when, as Sharansky says, there is no difference between any Jews no matter their faith, then there is no reason to exclude Jews for Jesus anymore. None. Zero. I bet they are more pious than most of your liberal Modox rabbis.
Your response is not coherent. None of these sentences follow each other, and none of then have any connection to what I wrote.
Well obviously you didn't read Natan's post
Outside yeshivahland some questions are more 'thinking points'. Contemplate for a few hundred years and then we can discuss. Not an instant answer usually wrong.
Sorry, after a few years of reading this blog, I don't expect anything to do with thinking.
"I was also honored when a certain black-hatted rabbinic leader with a very prestigious position came over to me and said that he enjoys reading my blog!"
Don't let it get to your head. Like the rest of us, he probably just enjoys watching you be made to look like a doofus, time and time again.
Unfounded speculation. Many black hatters (secretly) read stuff that would be frowned upon in their own communities. (e.g. In the Israeli Charedi world there are "underground" חבורות that learn the Torah of Rav Kook.)
Don't think that all Charedim are as close minded as Ha'aretz would have you believe. (Consider that much of what Natan was attacked for was just rewarmed content already widely served in the Charedi world- at least in the USA.)
"within the boundaries of what can be done without undermining the framework" - this my main contention with this blog. Pointing out (in other posts) certain Charedi inconsistencies, beliefs and even unhealthy attitudes - without recognizing that they serve to uphold a larger ethos - is damaging. For example, Rav Gershon Adelstein saying Bein Hazmanim causes more accidents b/c of a lack of learning is productive to the entire enterprise of Judaism from the macro level because his followers take it seriously. Reducing all the charedi-idms as this blog does undermines the framework. If you notice it, leave it alone (most of the time.) I won't be teaching my kids theistic evolution unless its necessary.
Oh, I agree, they absolutely all serve to uphold a larger ethos. But that ethos itself is incredibly damaging and dangerous for both the charedi community and the entire country!
That ethos, the unyielding commitment to torah and halacha, is the backbone of the jewish nation - something you do not find anywhere else (if were being honest.) These statements are spiritual bravado so-to-speak that we shouldn't undermine even if we roll our eyes at their statments (R' Gershon Adelstein.)
You see, that's where we disagree. I do not believe that the communal abandonment of the Torah's values vis-a-vis the value of work and national responsibilities reflects a commitment to Torah, nor provided the backbone of the nation.
You're not getting it. I don't either see the communal abandonment as a fulfillment of Torah values. I see it as an unfortunate reactionary response to unyielding secularism - something that is entirely inevitable. You always lampoon the fallout from Charedi isolationism (which produce these maladies) without realizing that these things are package deals - societies don't function like individuals. On a personal level, I don't adopt MANY Charedi attitudes, but from a societal perspective, I root for the team because deconstructing the society destroys the enterprise. Does anyone get what I'm saying?
Nobody who knows anything DOESN'T get what you're saying. It's like denying the sky is blue. He is fooling nobody but himself.
Pretend everything is beseder and it will be beseder. No it won't.
Yep, I'm totally with you.
Yakov wins this round
A new religion called Chareidism.
Continuing repetition of inconsistencies and contradictions that you know are not proper and you claim to be proper and true, erases trust and belief. It leads to rejection of the Chareidi affiliation and commitment to Torah.
פיו ולבו שווים ,is basic to religious commitment.
I see you understand what I'm saying. I think their is a nuanced difference between localized personal stances and attitudes you take vis-a-vis the community as a whole. In personal and non-official discussions (not public speeches or in print) people will express all sorts of heresies ("why is my tuition raised because of breaks to Kollel families" + the Charedi readers of this blog) that will never be spoken in public so as to keep the foundations of the institutions sturdy. To your point, when there is an explicit Piv V'Libo Ayno Shaviin (Chaim Walder episode) there is a trickle up effect that causes slow evolution in the establishments while offering the establishments plausible deniability that there ever was a problem. You see how this works?
Is your answer some sort of 'aveiroh lishmoh' tirutz? We can't fund an anti-secularism kollel/can't speak English properly societal lifestyle without benefit fraud, so that makes it ok?
I dont think you're understanding what im saying.
That's a good one LOL. Now we can excuse their laziness, lack of patriotism and being cowardly as a justifiable response to... secularism. Hilarious.
See my comment to yekutiel
Slifkin is down for the count.
Lol, you can redefine Judaism as "tikkun olam values" all you want, the Reform have already done this for 200 years, but nobody with Torah education is fooled. And you are only fooling yourself.
Tikun Olum is ביום ההוא יהיה ה אחד ושמו אחד. It's part of Torah Judaism.
לתקן עלום במלכות ש-י. Tikkun Olam means a Torah kingdom where everybody recognizes Hashem and follows His commandments. Not the way the Reform movement (which you and your rabbis are apologists for) use it.
More ignorance. The "liberal" use of the term תיקון עולם didn't really exist significantly until at least the 1970s. There were some precursors, but they were limited and that would only be the 1950s, or if you stretch and strain, the 1930s.
"200 years"? No.
Lol. Where would I be without your pedantry Ephraim?
How are minyan factories an unyielding commitment to torah and halochoh? What about benefit fraud? On a communal level, chareidie ethics may have this unyielding commitment. On an individual level, it is only found amongst yechidim. No different from other branches of orthodoxy.
"Benefit fraud" is such a tired out stereotype. Do you have any evidence of it on a communal scale? Taking advantage of available benefits is no more fraudulent than taking advantage of tax loopholes and offshore accounts. (And besides, the liberal ethos teaches us that one is never allowed to engage in stereotypes in the first place.)
Yes. I won't name my community. But they are paid (even in kollel) on the books the minimum amount to qualify for benefits (benefits are generally not given to layabouts and those not employed at all) and the balance in cash. Claiming to be 'not living together like spouses' to increase benefits. And then we have schools taking grants when they do not qualify. And simply not disclosing assets to receive more benefits.
If all that is true of your community, which I doubt, then its atypical. Most frum institutions are strictly by the book, and many of them have independent auditors to validate their practices. It's true, as I readily concede, that as a community they take advantage of all programs available, and perhaps they even test the boundaries. But if so, they are no different than other communities, businesses, and industries. If the benefits are out there - however unwisely that may be - then people are going to take advantage.
See my response to RNS above.
In more detail, how does a violent internal gur struggle (transgressing numerous mitzvos)have anything to do with secularism? How does burning trash, rioting, blocking roads(ditto re mitzvos) have anything to do with secularism? How do minyan factories have anything to do with secularism? How does benefit and mortgage fraud have anything to do with secularism?
You're very near sighted. Rejection of modernity → isolationism + tribalism = resistance
We already discussed all that in this comment thread
https://irrationalistmodoxism.substack.com/p/natan-seems-completely-unaware-of/comment/11859829
https://irrationalistmodoxism.substack.com/p/natan-seems-completely-unaware-of/comment/11866239
See these posts https://irrationalistmodoxism.substack.com/p/modern-orthodoxy-essay-by-rav-keller
https://irrationalistmodoxism.substack.com/p/the-modern-orthodox-conundrum
It doesn't address my point. How is one branch of gur bashing up the other (literally) an unyielding commitment to torah and mitzvos? There are numerous examples to those who stop drinking the cool-aid. A very small subset of chareidi society, serious people in kollel, might uphold this. But the rest, its all image and chitzonious.
Look at the adverts for fancy hotels and stuff in the chareidi press. My wife tells me benei berak has skirts too short just like everywhere else.That is secularism just as much as anything else. Chareidim just define terms to suit themselves.
Seriously, I don't think anyone reading this blog gives a damn about Gur, even the Chareidim here.
You sound like you might have a chassidishe background yourself. If so, you are being too hard on your own community. No society is or ever has been perfect. But to equate Chassidism with secularism is really too far.
I like your overall direction but I couldn't disagree with the above statement more. I still can't get my head around why a believing Jew should have a hard time understanding that an increase in tragedies is due to a lack of Torah study. See here:
https://irrationalistmodoxism.substack.com/p/is-there-anything-at-all-rational
We believe in the Orthodox enterprise,Mesorah or whatever you wish to call it. If we see a community that doesn't really believe in religious commitment we won't be convinced and certainly won't be inspired.
Interestingly, RGE has made statements in the past showing great appreciation for soldiers in the IDF.
Say what you want about the tenets of Charedim, at least its an ethos.
Pretending is not honesty or commitment to Mesorah. Your not serious how can one believe in your religious declarations. If the structure is very far from reality it falls.
It's been noted before that the loudest calls for "diversity" usually come from the *least* diverse and most homogenous people in the country. Vermont voters, Reform Jews, etc. So be careful who you make common cause with.
Vermonters and Reform Jews join with minority groups calling for diversity and civil rights. The white supremacists, white separatists, and the parochial communities stand alone in their bigotry. smh
They call for diversity as long as none of those poor black people live in their neighborhood or go their "good" schools, lol
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2023/04/front-yard-placards-nimby-dei-refugees/673706/
And what do your kind do to further civil rights for minorities? Not shit that’s what. In fact y’all support parties that suppress civil rights. I’ll call out that bullshit right there.
Important point: Sharansky is absolutely Orthodox. He is simply not fully observant, but he in no way identifies as Masorti or Reform.
Gotta love the never-ending judementalism.
"Likewise, I understand why people might not want to hear presentations from someone of lesser religious affiliation, . . . "
. . . Does "someone of lesser religious affiliation" mean me (Reform/Reconstructionist/Renewal) ?
My personal observance doesn't match up with charedi expectations, and they'd consider me either "fallen away" or simply a goy. On the other hand, I make it a point _not_ to steal from the State, something which many haredim have forgotten about.
"Many "haredim"? How many is many, big talker? Is that like "many" blacks are indolent? Or "many" Jews are pushy? How many other stereotypes do you want to engage in while you're shooting your mouth off about "haredim"?
Don't worry. All these guys secretly judge each other's practices even when they're on the same side on political/social issues.
As Snowden's leaks amply demonstrated.
The question and answer about why a stork is a non-kosher bird was given by the the first Gerer Rebbe, the Chidushei haRim. That implies that you need to be bound what he considers inclusivity.
Additionally, the issue is further complicated by the first posuk of tehillim, that is darshaned to mean one should stay away from negative people.
אַ֥שְֽׁרֵי הָאִ֗ישׁ אֲשֶׁ֤ר ׀ לֹ֥א הָלַךְ֮ בַּעֲצַ֢ת רְשָׁ֫עִ֥ים וּבְדֶ֣רֶךְ חַ֭טָּאִים לֹ֥א עָמָ֑ד וּבְמוֹשַׁ֥ב לֵ֝צִ֗ים לֹ֣א יָשָֽׁב׃
https://milatova.org.il/webinar/
I tracked down the quote -- it's here:
https://www.rationalistjudaism.com/p/everyone-does-it
I am assuming that it's reasonable to refer to the head of Shas as "haredi". If not, I apologize to all haredim.
I was thinking about a previous post of R. Slifkin's, about Aryeh Deri saying that "Everybody does it", about cheating the government. I assumed it was his own supporters that he was talking about, since he'd know them best.
But you're right, I shouldn't use stereotyping -- you have my apologies.
Aryeh Deri never said "everybody does it", don't just believe everything you read.
Usually when someone says, "Everybody does it" they mean, don't look at us--the *opposition* is just as bad.
Great site you got here! I think I'll be taking some of the style in mind. The buds at Roy Lumber and Oxford Lumber Drive love this kind of stuff. You're doin a great service to the industry! Good luck!
"I understand why people might not want to hear presentations from someone of lesser religious affiliation, but if they are not saying anything against their religious beliefs, is that adequate reason to exclude them?"
One day you might come across how R Chaim Soloveitchik answered that question.
"If Moshe Rabbeinu could get useful guidance from a Midianite priest, surely we can get useful guidance from people outside of our community!"
One day you might come across the מדרש שמואל על אבות'es guidelines of when to maintain a distance and when not, and you might come across R Aharon Kotler's comments regarding Yisro.
A good idea when wondering how any given phenomenon is addressed by whatever community, is to think if it's 'a deja vu' and search that community's history all the earlier times and what rationales were offered. Refusing the podium to the less religious is old news countless times, countless places. Find out the historic rationales.
You also might want to come across the Or HaChaim's comments about Yisro. I give his comments just a little bit more weight than RAK's (not to diminish RAK).
(A similar thing happened before in your Mar 30 post, 'The Chametz Blitz'. You wonder that 'It could still be that the charedim feel that his halachic desecration [of secular activists bringing Chametz to hospitals on Pesach in response to the Chametz ban law sponsored by the Chareidim] is worth it in order to take a strong public stand about religion. But I wonder if such a calculation is even being made, let alone whether it is valid.'
(But Chareidi activism/statements which cause violation of Halacha is going on as far back as we rember and beyond. This would be re-investigating the wheel.
(And you ask '(let alone) whether it is valid'. Years ago this was asked of Chareidi Poskim and they addressed it based on שיטה מקובצת ביצה ל. בסוגיא דמוטב שיהיו שוגגין. What would be the plan, every time Chareidim dig in their heels and the secular respond in kind, that you ask if the response was anticipated let alone valid, and I should quote the שיטה?)
120 years of the Mizrachi movement have been a veritable disaster for its followers and the hapless masses who had sent their poor kids into the shmad factories known as ממלכתי דתי בתי ספר. Mizrachi worships Zionism, elevates it over Judaism and continues the shmad unabaintgly to this very day. I'd learned in a Mizrachi Yeshiva 45 years ago and nothing has changed since that time.
'After all, there are certainly limits to the Torah’s inclusivity, especially with regard to non-Jews. So what’s the value in talking about being inclusive, if you just draw the line a little further out?'
ואהבת לרעיך כמוך - רעיך במיצוות. These are the parameters and every nation has similar limitations because 'diversity' is a disaster for the survival and the prosperity of a group. This politicaly incorrect reality is an evolutionary necessity אם חפצים חיים אנחנו.
You the author of the book "The Empty Wagon"?
Never heard of it.
Funny how all your comments are somehow anti-Zionists rants. The book is an polemic against Zionism, written by yakov. Funny thing is, all your comments seem to come straight out of his book.
Zionism is a Jewish national liberation movememt, which had to arise due to the historical circumstances. It's no different then similar movements of other nations in that historical period. Mizrachi sees it as divine and messianic and has sacrificed hundreds of thousands on its altar. This is what I know from having learned in a Mizrachi yeshiva and I reject that faith as heresy and nonsense. I'm not against the state, the army or the secular education, but I'm against seeing them as the fulfilment of the Torah. I would say that I'm a chareidi affiliated independened thinker. If Torah is of primary importance to you, affiliating with the charedim is the best way to live and educate your children. There aren't many 3rd generation mizrochnikim and for a good reason.
Doesn't matter the intention of Zionism, the point is, they are/were messengers of God in returning the Jewish people to their homeland. Why fight that, clearly it is the will of God.
That's what Mizrachi believes. A chiloni Jew in Eretz Yisroel working and serving in the army is bringing the Geulah, wheras a galuti shomer Torah is delaying it. I don't accept this beleif.
You don't come here often enough to know what else people say.
So you have 2 accounts?
Another mistake you made. I'm not Yakov.
Don't confuse evolution with Spencer's social darwinism. One is a scientific fact and the other is pseudoscience.
You must have been sleeping.
Unlike certain other movements they don't worship their hereditary chiefs
When I attended the shalosh seudos of Rav Zvi Yehuda, I observed all the elements of chassidic adoration.
You do know that Rav Kook came from both a Lithuanian and Chassidic background.
You're agreeing with Todd?
I didn't address him.
IOW, Todd claimed that worship of hereditary chiefs is limited to outside Mizrahi. Yakov testified that no, he saw it within Mizrahi. And you traced that to Chassidic roots.